Pathways of the unconscious: When the body is the receiver/instrument

ABSTRACT

The author makes a distinction between Freud's notion of the “unconscious as instrument”, which it is only possible to know about from derivatives in the context of a setting with specific and necessary conditions, and the notion of “countertransference”- the term that is often used in contemporary literature to describe a direct transmission of conscious or preconscious experience, which is more akin to “thought transference”. The author posits that the derivatives of the patient's unconscious happenings in the session, as they are experienced in the analyst's “unconscious as instrument”, can take different pathways. The author goes on to specifically discuss the bodily pathway of the unconscious derivatives, suggesting that these derivatives indicate the primitive nature of what is being emitted and the state of the receiver. The body acts as a concrete container for the “excess”, which at that point in time cannot be transformed and understood, is beyond symbolization, and along with other indices, will require further psychic work.

L'auteur fait une distinction entre, d'une part, la notion de Freud de ‘l'inconscient comme instrument' qu'il n'est possible de connaitre qu'à partir de ses dérivés dans le contexte d'un cadre et de conditions spécifiques et nécessaires, et, d'autre part, la notion de ‘contre-transfert', le concept souvent utilisé dans la littérature contemporaine pour décrire une transmission directe de l'expérience consciente ou préconsciente, et qui s'apparente plutôt à un ‘transfert de pensée'. L'auteur postule que les dérivés des événements inconscients du patient au cours de la séance, tels qu'ils sont vécus dans l'inconscient de l'analyste comme instrument, peuvent prendre des voies différentes. Puis l'auteur de débattre spécifiquement les voies corporelles des dérivés inconscients, suggérant que ces dérivés indiquent la nature primitive de ce qui est émis ainsi que l'état du récepteur. Le corps agit comme récipient matériel pour ‘l'excès’, qui à ce moment même peut être ni transformé ni compris, qui est au-delà de la symbolisation, et, en conjonction avec d'autres indices, exigera un travail psychique plus élaboré.

Die Autorin unterscheidet zwischen Freuds Vorstellung vom ‚Unbewussten als Instrument', von dem man nur durch Derivate im Kontext eines Settings mit spezifischen und notwendigen Bedingungen wissen kann, und der Vorstellung von ‚Gegenübertragung' - dem Begriff, der in der Literatur der Gegenwart häufig zur Beschreibung einer direkten Übertragung bewussten oder vorbewussten Erlebens verwendet wird, was eigentlich eher einer ‚Gedankenübertragung' gleichkommt. Die Autorin postuliert, dass die Derivate der unbewussten Ereignisse des Patienten in der Sitzung, wie sie vom Analytiker im ‚Unbewussten als Instrument' erfahren werden, verschiedene Wege gehen können. Die Autorin geht im Anschluss speziell auf den körperlichen Weg der unbewussten Derivate ein und legt nahe, dass diese Derivate den primitiven Charakter dessen, was abgesondert wird und den Zustand des Empfängers anzeigen. Der Körper fungiert als ein konkreter Container für den ‚Überschuss', der zu jenem Zeitpunkt nicht umgewandelt und verstanden werden kann, für Symbolisierung nicht zugänglich ist und zusammen mit anderen Hinweisen eine Fortführung der Arbeit mit der Psyche notwendig macht.

L'Autrice opera una distinzione tra la nozione freudiana dell'‘inconscio come strumento', che è possibile conoscere esclusivamente a partire dai suoi derivati osservabili nel contesto di un setting rispondente a criteri specifici e necessari, e la nozione di ‘controtransfert' - il termine che la letteratura analitica contemporanea spesso utilizza per descrivere una trasmissione di tipo diretto dell'esperienza conscia o preconscia: processo che è più simile a un ‘transfert di pensiero'. L'Autrice sostiene che i derivati della vita inconscia del paziente durante la seduta, laddove essi sono esperiti nell'‘inconscio come strumento' dell'analista, possono prendere diverse strade: tra queste ella discute specificamente la strada corporea dei derivati inconsci, suggerendo come essi offrano informazioni circa la natura primitiva di ciò che viene emesso e anche sullo stato del ricevente. Il corpo funziona in questo senso come contenitore concreto di un ‘eccesso’ che in quel preciso momento non può essere trasformato e compreso, non riesce a essere simbolizzato e (accanto ad altri indicatori) richiederà ulteriore lavoro psichico.

La autora distingue entre la idea de Freud del “inconsciente como instrumento”, que solo puede conocerse a través de sus derivados en el contexto de un encuadre con condiciones específicas y necesarias, y la idea de “contratransferencia”, término usado a menudo en la literatura contemporánea para describir la transmisión directa de experiencia consciente o preconsciente, que es más afín a la “transferencia de pensamientos”. Asimismo, plantea que los derivados de las ocurrencias inconscientes del paciente en la sesión, tal como son experimentados por el “inconsciente como instrumento” del analista, pueden tomar caminos diferentes. Luego pasa a analizar específicamente el camino somático de los derivados inconscientes, sugiriendo que estos indican la naturaleza primitiva de lo que se emite y el estado del receptor. El cuerpo actúa como continente concreto para el “exceso”, que en ese momento no puede ser transformado ni comprendido, está más allá de la simbolización y, junto con otros índices, requiere mayor trabajo psíquico.

KEYWORDS:

• Unconscious as instrument
• derivatives
• countertransference
• reverie
• telepathy
• thought transference

Notes

1 Paula Heimann, along with her influential 1950 paper “On Countertransference,” sanctioned using a whole range of affective reactions which had previously been deemed to be “taboo” (King 1989, 7). According to Pearl King, Paula Heimann gives the date of 1949 as the beginning of her split with Klein (King 1989), which led to Melanie Klein’s request that she resign from the Klein Trust in 1955 and Heimann’s own statement that she no longer wanted to be considered a member of the Klein group.

2 Klein’s position is similar in making a distinction. About “countertransference” she writes: “I still think that analysts are misled when they think that what goes on in them is a guide to what goes on in the patient … I personally have very little use for that” (2017, 109). However, she also writes: “Our critical faculties undoubtedly remain active all along, but they have retreated into the background to leave the way free for our unconscious to get into touch with the unconscious of the patient.” She adds that there needs to be “good co-operation between the conscious and the unconscious mind on the part of the analyst [which] implies also a good balance between his intellectual and emotional faculties” (2017, 30). This cooperation is probably what distinguishes it from how she understands the negative use of “countertransference.”

3 “ … the phenomenon of thought-transference … is so close to telepathy … [it] can without much violence be regarded as the same thing.”

4 He was already thinking about these issues in 1890 when he writes: “Even when a person is engaged in quietly thinking in a string of ‘ideas’, there are a constant series of excitations, corresponding to the content of these ideas, which are discharged into the smooth or striated muscles. These excitations can be made apparent if they are appropriately reinforced, and certain striking and, indeed, ostensibly ‘supernatural’ phenomena can be explained by this means. Thus, what is known as ‘thought-reading’ [Gedanken errateri] may be explained by small, involuntary muscular movements carried out by the ‘medium’ in the course of an experiment” (1890, 288).

5 “Containment, like countertransference is another ‘elastic concept’.” As I wrote in a footnote in 1996, “Containment, in my view, involves this bisexual aspect. I think that it is not a purely maternal function as has been suggested by Bion and others but already combines both the maternal function of being with and the paternal function of observing and linking. In order to contain her infant, a mother (and an analyst) has to receive the projections empathically (the maternal function) and also take a perspective on this (paternal function)” (Birksted-Breen 1996, 652). For Segal, “ … the essential element of containment is the analyst’s understanding” (1997, 115).

6 Or in a different language we could say “psychotic anxieties” are aroused.

7 I am not distinguishing whether this excess is due to the excitation from inside which breaks through the “protective shield” in Freudian terminology or due to something inassimilable coming from the other in a Laplanchian sense. Bion’s notion of Beta elements is another way of thinking about this excess.

8 In a personal communication Jorge Canestri mentions that in 1963 Lacan began his Séminaire with the title “Les Noms du Père” or “Les non-dupes errent” (in speech the two are identical), the idea being that to have access to the symbolic order and “castration” and identity one needs to be duped into accepting the law of the father. This has relevance in that, within my own framework and terminology, I was mentioning that the issue was around “asymmetry,” that is with accepting the Oedipal structure, and also with the loss of the “symbolic” (language) at that point.

9 It is interesting to note that when analysts report on what they tend to call “countertransference dreams,” they have a certainty about the link with a particular patient and session which goes beyond a simple free association. This was certainly the situation in my case.